Powered by Rolls-Royce RB211-535C/E4/E4B Turbofan Engines

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. 98-NM-323-AD; Amendment 39-11487; AD 99-27-06]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB

Series Airplanes

Powered by Rolls-Royce RB211-535C/E4/E4B Turbofan Engines

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration, DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This amendment adopts a new airworthiness directive (AD),

applicable to certain Boeing Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series

airplanes, that requires repetitive inspections of the engine thrust

control cable system to detect discrepancies of the wire rope,

fittings, and pulleys; and replacement, if necessary. This amendment

also requires a one-time inspection to determine the part number of

certain pulleys and replacement of existing pulleys with new pulleys,

if necessary; and modification of the engine thrust control cable

installation. This amendment is prompted by reports of failure of

certain engine thrust control cables. The actions specified by this AD

are intended to prevent failure of certain engine thrust control

cables, which could result in a severe asymmetric thrust condition

during landing, and consequent reduced controllability of the airplane.

DATES: Effective February 7, 2000.

The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in

the regulations is approved by the Director of the Federal Register as

of February 7, 2000.

ADDRESSES: The service information referenced in this AD may be

obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707, Seattle,

Washington 98124-2207. This information may be examined at the Federal

Aviation Administration (FAA), Transport Airplane Directorate, Rules

Docket, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of

the Federal Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700,

Washington, DC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathrine Rask, Aerospace Engineer,

Propulsion Branch, ANM-140S, FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate,

Seattle Aircraft Certification Office, 1601 Lind Avenue, SW., Renton,

Washington 98055-4056; telephone (425) 227-1547; fax (425) 227-1181.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A proposal to amend part 39 of the Federal

Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) to include an airworthiness

directive (AD) that is applicable to certain Boeing Model 757-200, -

200PF, and -200CB series airplanes was published as a supplemental

notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register on

September 10, 1999 (64 FR 49105). That action proposed to require

modification of the engine thrust control

[[Page 2]]

cable installation, and repetitive inspections to detect certain

discrepancies of the cables, pulleys, pulley brackets, and cable

travel; and repair, if necessary. That action also proposed to require

a one-time inspection to determine the part number of thrust control

cable pulleys and replacement of existing pulleys with new pulleys, if

necessary.

Comments

Interested persons have been afforded an opportunity to participate

in the making of this amendment. Due consideration has been given to

the comments received.

Support for the Proposal

One commenter supports the proposed rule, and one commenter states

that it is not affected by the rule and has no comments.

Request To Include Additional Source of Service Information

One commenter requests that the FAA cite Boeing Service Bulletin

757-30A0018, Revision 2, dated September 9, 1999, as an additional

source of service information for accomplishment of the modification

specified in paragraph (e) of the proposed rule.

The FAA concurs with the commenter's request. Boeing Service

Bulletin 757-30A0018, Revision 2, removes an airplane that has a

different routing of the window heat wire bundle (and, therefore, does

not need the support bracket assembly to ensure proper clearance

between the wire bundle and engine thrust control cable) from the

effectivity listing. In addition, Revision 2 corrects minor errors in

the accomplishment instructions. The FAA has revised paragraph (e) of

the final rule to state that the paragraph is applicable to airplanes

listed in Revision 2 of the service bulletin. Also, paragraph (e) has

been revised to reference Revision 2 of the service bulletin, in

addition to Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-30A0018, Revision 1,

dated September 17, 1998 (which was cited in the proposal), as

appropriate sources of service information.

Request To Revise Cost Impact

One commenter states that it would take approximately 18 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the inspection specified in paragraph (a) of

the proposed rule. The commenter also requests that the Cost Impact

section include the estimated cost for replacement of phenolic pulleys

with aluminum pulleys, specified in paragraph (b) of the proposed rule.

The FAA concurs with the commenter's requests and has revised the Cost

Impact section of the final rule in accordance with new cost data

provided by the commenter and the airplane manufacturer.

Request To Revise Applicability

One commenter requests that Model 757-200PF series airplanes be

removed from the applicability of the proposed AD. The commenter states

that Model 757-200PF series airplanes are not listed in the effectivity

of any of the Boeing service bulletins referenced in the proposed AD.

The FAA does not concur. Although Model 757-200PF series airplanes

are not subject to paragraphs (c), (d), and (e) of the final rule

(which reference Boeing service bulletins), these airplanes are subject

to paragraphs (a) and (b). The engine installation of the Rolls-Royce

Model RB211-535E4 turbofan engine on the Model 757-200 and -200PF

series airplanes is identical; therefore, the same unsafe condition

exists. No change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request To Eliminate Repetitive Inspections

One commenter requests that the repetitive inspections of the

engine thrust control cables be removed from the proposed AD. The

commenter states that the proposed rule addresses specific failure

modes of the cables, and that once those corrective actions have been

accomplished, the existing Boeing Maintenance Planning Document (MPD)

inspection interval is adequate. The commenter states that the tracking

and records burden of the repetitive inspections would not provide a

cost-effective benefit or substantially increase safety margins. The

commenter suggests that, if the FAA determines that more frequent

inspections are necessary, a maintenance review board (MRB) revision

would be the most appropriate means to provide for such inspections.

The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request. The

corrective actions and modifications to the engine thrust control cable

installation specified in paragraphs (b) through (e) of the AD do not

eliminate the unsafe condition. The thrust reverser control system on

this airplane model is such that, when the engine thrust control ``B''

cable fails during landing, it changes the position of the thrust

reverser directional control valve causing the thrust reverser to stow

and the engine to accelerate. The opposite engine is unaffected by the

cable failure and remains in full reverse. This severe asymmetric

thrust condition during landing is the unsafe condition. None of the

modifications required by this AD change the failure mode of the cable.

The repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (a) of the AD are

intended to detect wear and corrosion prior to cable failure. Such wear

and corrosion could be caused by numerous problems, not just those

addressed by the actions specified in paragraphs (b) through (e) of the

AD. Furthermore, a revision to the MRB report would not adequately

address the unsafe condition. The MRB process allows for extension of

inspection intervals, on an operator-by-operator basis, based on the

rate of discrepancies identified in previous inspections. The

discrepancies detected during the repetitive inspections would not

necessarily be chronic problems but could be induced by unrelated

airplane configuration changes near the cable run. No change to the

final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request To Extend Repetitive Inspection Interval

One commenter requests that the interval for the repetitive

inspections specified in paragraph (a) of the proposed rule be extended

to an interval coinciding with a ``2C'' check. The commenter states

that this is what is currently required by the Boeing MPD.

The FAA does not concur. There have been two engine thrust control

cable failures on Model 757 series airplanes. One event was described

in the NPRM. Another event, which the FAA became aware of shortly

before the NPRM was released, occurred in January 1999. There was no

evidence in these events that the operators were not following the

Boeing MPD recommendation for thrust control cable inspections every

``2C'' check. Given this experience and the possibly catastrophic

effect of a thrust control cable failure, the FAA has determined that

it is necessary to require more frequent inspections of the cable

installation. Therefore, this AD requires the cable inspection at an

interval coinciding approximately with a ``C'' check for the majority

of the affected fleet. No change to the final rule is necessary in this

regard.

In addition, two commenters request that the repetitive interval

for the inspections specified in paragraph (a) of the proposed rule be

extended. The commenters suggest intervals that would coincide with the

commenters' own ``C'' check intervals. One commenter states that the

proposed interval would require special scheduling and would create an

economic burden. The other commenter notes that the FAA stated in the

proposed rule that it is the FAA's intent that the inspections be

performed

[[Page 3]]

during a regular scheduled maintenance visit.

The FAA does not concur with the commenters' request to extend the

compliance time. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this

action, the FAA considered not only the practical aspect of

accomplishing the inspections at an interval of time that parallels

normal scheduled maintenance for the majority of affected operators,

but the possible failure modes of the engine thrust control cables. In

consideration of these items, as well as the in-service failures of the

cables described previously, the FAA has determined that 24 months or

6,000 flight hours, whichever occurs first, represents an appropriate

interval of time allowable wherein the inspections can be accomplished

during scheduled maintenance intervals for the majority of affected

operators, and an acceptable level of safety can be maintained. No

change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request To Eliminate One-Time Inspection

One commenter requests that paragraph (b) of the proposed rule,

which requires a one-time inspection of the engine thrust control cable

pulleys in the struts and replacement of any phenolic pulleys with

aluminum pulleys, be removed. Instead, the commenter suggests that the

phenolic pulleys be replaced with aluminum pulleys only if damage is

detected during the repetitive inspections specified in paragraph (a)

of the proposed rule. The commenter states that the repetitive

inspections would preclude the elapse of a significant time period of

operation with a seized pulley and that a seized pulley would be

identified before any significant cable wear could occur.

The FAA does not concur. Although the in-service problems with the

phenolic pulleys in a high-temperature environment have not resulted in

an engine thrust control cable failure, the FAA has determined that

there is enough variability in how airplanes in the fleet are operated,

in addition to the possible catastrophic effect of a cable failure, to

warrant removal of the phenolic pulleys prior to seizure. Therefore, no

change to the final rule is necessary in this regard.

Request To Clarify Affected Part Numbers

Two commenters suggest that phenolic engine thrust control cable

pulleys having part number (P/N) BACP30M4 in the strut be included in

any requirement that specifies phenolic pulleys having P/N 65B80977-1.

The commenters state that pulleys having P/N BACP30M4 are

interchangeable with pulleys having P/N 65B80977-1 and are installed on

many of the airplanes affected by the proposed rule.

The FAA concurs. Paragraph (b) of the final rule has been revised

to include phenolic pulleys having P/N BACP30M4. The FAA has determined

that this addition does not necessitate reopening of the comment

period. The supplemental NPRM clearly states in the preamble that the

unsafe condition is associated with any phenolic pulleys in the struts,

not just those having P/N 65B80977-1. Therefore, the FAA finds that the

public has had a reasonable opportunity to comment on its intent.

Request for Information on Service Information

One commenter notes that paragraph (b) of the proposed rule does

not reference a service bulletin. The commenter requests information

regarding the availability of service information for the actions

specified in paragraph (b), and the configuration of the airplanes to

which paragraph (b) applies at the time of airplane delivery to the

operator. No specific change to the rule is requested.

The FAA agrees that paragraph (b) of the proposed rule does not

reference a service bulletin. The airplane manufacturer has not issued

a service bulletin for the Model 757 series airplane describing

procedures for the actions specified in paragraph (b); however, it has

published Boeing Service Letter 757-SL-004-A, dated July 21, 1997,

addressing this subject. Model 757 series airplanes powered by Rolls-

Royce engines and having line numbers 1 through 636 inclusive were

delivered from the airplane manufacturer to the operator with phenolic

pulleys installed in the struts. Airplanes having line numbers 637 and

subsequent were delivered with aluminum pulleys installed in the

struts. No specific change to the final rule is necessary in this

regard.

Request To Extend Compliance Time for Modification

One commenter requests that the compliance time for the

modification specified in paragraph (e) of the proposed rule be

extended. The commenter suggests no specific compliance time. The

commenter states that a single failure without sufficient evidence that

the engine thrust control cable was being inspected in accordance with

the Boeing MPD does not warrant regulatory action within 60 days.

The FAA does not concur with the commenter's request to extend the

compliance time. In developing an appropriate compliance time for this

action, the FAA considered the safety implications, parts availability,

and normal maintenance schedules for timely accomplishment of the

modification. In consideration of these items, as well as a report of

another airplane with contact between the window heat wire bundle and

engine thrust control cables in service, the FAA has determined that 60

days represents an appropriate interval of time allowable wherein the

modifications can be accomplished during scheduled maintenance

intervals for the majority of affected operators, and an acceptable

level of safety can be maintained. No change to the final rule is

necessary in this regard.

Explanation of Other Changes to Cost Impact

The cost impact section, below, has been revised. The applicability

of the AD has not changed, but because the airplane model affected by

this AD is continuing to be manufactured, the number of affected

airplanes has increased slightly since publication of the proposed

rule. Also, the proposed rule estimated the cost of the one-time

inspection for all airplanes; however, this action only applies to a

limited number of airplanes.

Conclusion

After careful review of the available data, including the comments

noted above, the FAA has determined that air safety and the public

interest require the adoption of the rule with the changes previously

described. The FAA has determined that these changes will neither

increase the economic burden on any operator nor increase the scope of

the AD.

Cost Impact

There are approximately 500 Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB

series airplanes of the affected design in the worldwide fleet. The FAA

estimates that 257 airplanes of U.S. registry will be affected by this

AD.

For all airplanes, it will take approximately 18 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required inspection to verify the integrity

of the thrust control cables, at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Based on these figures, the cost impact of this inspection

required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $277,560, or

$1,080 per airplane, per inspection cycle.

[[Page 4]]

For airplanes required to accomplish the one-time inspection to

determine the part number of the thrust control cable pulleys (142

U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take approximately 1 work hour per

airplane, at an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these

figures, the cost impact of this inspection required by this AD on U.S.

operators is estimated to be $8,520, or $60 per airplane.

Should an operator be required to accomplish the pulley

replacement, it will take approximately 16 work hours per airplane, at

an average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost

approximately $2,224 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost

impact of this inspection required by this AD on U.S. operators is

estimated to be $3,184 per airplane.

For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-76-1 (8

U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take approximately 2 work hours per

airplane to accomplish the required guide bracket removal, at an

average labor rate of $60 per work hour. Based on these figures, the

cost impact of this replacement required by this AD on U.S. operators

is estimated to be $960, or $120 per airplane.

For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-76-0005 (14

U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take approximately 14 work hours

per airplane to accomplish the required replacement, at an average

labor rate of $60 per work hour. Required parts will cost approximately

$1,410 per airplane. Based on these figures, the cost impact of this

replacement required by this AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be

$31,500, or $2,250 per airplane.

For airplanes identified in Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-

30A0018, Revision 1 (167 U.S.-registered airplanes), it will take

approximately 2 work hours per airplane to accomplish the required

installation and adjustment, at an average labor rate of $60 per work

hour. Required parts will cost approximately $192 per airplane. Based

on these figures, the cost impact of this installation and adjustment

required by AD on U.S. operators is estimated to be $52,104, or $312

per airplane.

The cost impact figures discussed above are based on assumptions

that no operator has yet accomplished any of the requirements of this

AD action, and that no operator would accomplish those actions in the

future if this AD were not adopted.

Regulatory Impact

The regulations adopted herein will not have substantial direct

effects on the States, on the relationship between the national

government and the States, or on the distribution of power and

responsibilities among the various levels of government. Therefore, in

accordance with Executive Order 12612, it is determined that this final

rule does not have sufficient federalism implications to warrant the

preparation of a Federalism Assessment.

For the reasons discussed above, I certify that this action (1) is

not a ``significant regulatory action'' under Executive Order 12866;

(2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT Regulatory Policies and

Procedures (44 FR 11034, February 26, 1979); and (3) will not have a

significant economic impact, positive or negative, on a substantial

number of small entities under the criteria of the Regulatory

Flexibility Act. A final evaluation has been prepared for this action

and it is contained in the Rules Docket. A copy of it may be obtained

from the Rules Docket at the location provided under the caption

ADDRESSES.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39

Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation safety, Incorporation by

reference, Safety.

Adoption of the Amendment

Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me by the

Administrator, the Federal Aviation Administration amends part 39 of

the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR part 39) as follows:

PART 39--AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVES

1. The authority citation for part 39 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40113, 44701.

Sec. 39.13 [Amended]

2. Section 39.13 is amended by adding the following new

airworthiness directive:

99-27-06 Boeing: Amendment 39-11487. Docket 98-NM-323-AD.

Applicability: Model 757-200, -200PF, and -200CB series

airplanes powered by Rolls-Royce RB211-535C/E4/E4B turbofan engines,

certificated in any category.

Note 1: This AD applies to each airplane identified in the

preceding applicability provision, regardless of whether it has been

modified, altered, or repaired in the area subject to the

requirements of this AD. For airplanes that have been modified,

altered, or repaired so that the performance of the requirements of

this AD is affected, the owner/operator must request approval for an

alternative method of compliance in accordance with paragraph (f) of

this AD. The request should include an assessment of the effect of

the modification, alteration, or repair on the unsafe condition

addressed by this AD; and, if the unsafe condition has not been

eliminated, the request should include specific proposed actions to

address it.

Compliance: Required as indicated, unless accomplished

previously.

To prevent engine thrust control cable failure, which could

result in a severe asymmetric thrust condition during landing, and

consequent reduced controllability of the airplane, accomplish the

following:

Inspections and Corrective Actions

(a) Within 24 months or 6,000 flight hours after the effective

date of this AD, whichever occurs first: Accomplish the ``Thrust

Control Cable Inspection Procedure'' specified in Appendix 1.

(including Figure 1) of this AD to verify the integrity of the

thrust control cables. Prior to further flight, repair any

discrepancy found in accordance with the procedures described in the

Boeing 757 Maintenance Manual. Repeat the inspection thereafter at

intervals not to exceed 24 months or 6,000 flight hours, whichever

occurs first.

(b) For airplanes having line numbers 1 through 636 inclusive:

Within 24 months or 6,000 flight hours after the effective date of

this AD, whichever occurs first, perform a one-time inspection of

the 8 engine thrust control cable pulleys in the struts (4 in each

strut) to determine the part number (P/N) of each pulley. If any

pulley having P/N 65B80977-1 or BAC30M4 is installed, prior to

further flight, replace it with a pulley having P/N 255T1232-7, in

accordance with the procedures described in the Boeing 757 Airplane

Maintenance Manual.

Note 2: The location of the pulleys to be inspected in

accordance with paragraph (b) of this AD is specified in Chapters

53-11-53-04, 76-11-52-01, and 76-11-52-02 of the Boeing 757

Illustrated Parts Catalog.

Modifications

(c) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-76-

1, dated May 18, 1984: Within 24 months or 6,000 flight hours after

the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, remove the

guide bracket of the engine thrust control cable located on the

front spar of the right wing in accordance with the service

bulletin.

(d) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-76-

0005, dated May 5, 1988: Within 24 months or 6,000 flight hours

after the effective date of this AD, whichever occurs first, remove

the engine thrust control cable breakaway stop assemblies, and

replace sections of the engine thrust control cables with smaller

diameter cables in accordance with the service bulletin.

(e) For airplanes identified in Boeing Service Bulletin 757-

30A0018, Revision 2, dated September 9, 1999: Within 60 days after

the effective date of this AD, install a support bracket assembly

between the window heat wire bundle and the engine thrust control

cable; and adjust the wire bundle clearance, as necessary, to

parallel the minimum clearance specified in Boeing Alert Service

Bulletin 757-30A0018, Revision 1, dated September 17, 1998; or

Boeing Service Bulletin 757-30A0018, Revision 2, dated September 9,

1999.

[[Page 5]]

Alternative Method of Compliance

(f) An alternative method of compliance or adjustment of the

compliance time that provides an acceptable level of safety may be

used if approved by the Manager, Seattle Aircraft Certification

Office (ACO), FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate. Operators shall

submit their requests through an appropriate FAA Principal

Maintenance Inspector, who may add comments and then send it to the

Manager, Seattle ACO.

Note 3: Information concerning the existence of approved

alternative methods of compliance with this AD, if any, may be

obtained from the Seattle ACO.

Special Flight Permits

(g) Special flight permits may be issued in accordance with

Secs. 21.197 and 21.199 of the Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR

21.197 and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a location where the

requirements of this AD can be accomplished.

Incorporation by Reference

(h) Except as provided by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this AD, the

modifications shall be done in accordance with Boeing Service

Bulletin 757-76-1, dated May 18, 1984; Boeing Service Bulletin 757-

76-0005, dated May 5, 1988; Boeing Alert Service Bulletin 757-

30A0018, Revision 1, dated September 17, 1998; and Boeing Service

Bulletin 757-30A0018, Revision 2, dated September 9, 1999. This

incorporation by reference was approved by the Director of the

Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part

51. Copies may be obtained from Boeing Commercial Airplane Group,

P.O. Box 3707, Seattle, Washington 98124-2207. Copies may be

inspected at the FAA, Transport Airplane Directorate, 1601 Lind

Avenue, SW., Renton, Washington; or at the Office of the Federal

Register, 800 North Capitol Street, NW., suite 700, Washington, DC.

(i) This amendment becomes effective on February 7, 2000.

Appendix 1.-- Thrust Control Cable Inspection Procedure

1. General

A. Clean the cables, if necessary, for the inspection, in

accordance with Boeing 757 Maintenance Manual 12-21-31.

B. Use these procedures to verify the integrity of the thrust

control cable system. The procedures must be performed along the

entire cable run for each engine. To ensure verification of the

portions of the cables which are in contact with pulleys and

quadrants, the thrust control must be moved by operation of the

thrust and/or the reverse thrust levers to expose those portions of

the cables.

C. The first task is an inspection of the control cable wire

rope. The second task is an inspection of the control cable

fittings. The third task is an inspection of the pulleys.

Note: These three tasks may be performed concurrently at one

location of the cable system on the airplane, if desired, for

convenience.

2. Inspection of the Control Cable Wire Rope

A. Perform a detailed visual inspection to ensure that the cable

does not contact parts other than pulleys, quadrants, cable seals,

or grommets installed to control the cable routing. Look for

evidence of contact with other parts. Correct the condition if

evidence of contact is found.

Note: For the purposes of this procedure, a detailed visual

inspection is defined as: ``An intensive visual examination of a

specific structural area, system, installation, or assembly to

detect damage, failure, or irregularity. Available lighting is

normally supplemented with a direct source of good lighting at

intensity deemed appropriate by the inspector. Inspection aids such

as mirror, magnifying lenses, etc., may be used. Surface cleaning

and elaborate access procedures may be required.''

B. Perform a detailed visual inspection of the cable runs to

detect incorrect routing, kinks in the wire rope, or other damage.

Replace the cable assembly if:

(1) One cable strand had worn wires where one wire cross section

is decreased by more than 40 percent (see Figure 1), (2) A kink is

found, or

(3) Corrosion is found.

C. Perform a detailed visual inspection of the cable: To check

for broken wires, rub a cloth along the length of the cable. The

cloth catches on broken wires.

(1) Replace the 7x7 cable assembly if there are two or more

broken wires in 12 continuous inches of cable or there are three or

more broken wires anywhere in the total cable assembly.

(2) Replace the 7x19 cable assembly if there are four or more

broken wires in 12 continuous inches of cable or there are six or

more broken wires anywhere in the total cable assembly.

3. Inspection of the Control Cable Fittings

A. Perform a detailed visual inspection to ensure that the means

of locking the joints are intact (wire locking, cotter pins,

turnbuckle clips, etc.). Install any missing parts.

B. Perform a detailed visual inspection of the swaged portions

of swaged end fittings to detect surface cracks or corrosion.

Replace the cable assembly if cracks or corrosion are found.

C. Perform a detailed visual inspection of the unswaged portion

of the end fitting. Replace the cable assembly if a crack is

visible, if corrosion is present, or if the end fitting is bent more

than 2 degrees.

D. Perform a detailed visual inspection of the turnbuckle.

Replace the turnbuckle if a crack is visible or if corrosion is

present.

4. Inspection of Pulleys

A. Perform a detailed visual inspection to ensure that pulleys

are free to rotate.

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P

[[Page 6]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR03JA00.000

BILLING CODE 4910-13-C

Issued in Renton, Washington, on December 22, 1999.

D.L. Riggin,

Acting Manager, Transport Airplane Directorate, Aircraft Certification

Service.

[FR Doc. 99-33731 Filed 12-30-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-13-P